Multi-faceted strategies to advance health equity in colorectal cancer screening in primary care setting: quality improvement project.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Health Services Research Pub Date : 2024-11-18 DOI:10.1186/s12913-024-11928-7
Einas Batarseh, Elizabeth Onyechi, Omar Arman, Gregory Gudleski, Jessica L Reynolds, Smita Bakhai
{"title":"Multi-faceted strategies to advance health equity in colorectal cancer screening in primary care setting: quality improvement project.","authors":"Einas Batarseh, Elizabeth Onyechi, Omar Arman, Gregory Gudleski, Jessica L Reynolds, Smita Bakhai","doi":"10.1186/s12913-024-11928-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this quality improvement (QI) project was to increase Colorectal Cancer (CRC) screening in patients ages 50-75 years from a baseline of 27-40% within 12 months in a primary care clinic in limited resource communities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The multidisciplinary QI-team applied the Plan-Do-Study-Act method and developed stakeholder analysis, an Ishikawa fish bone diagram, a process flow map, and a driver diagram. Major barriers to suboptimal CRC screening included limited health literacy, language preferences, absence of stool test options, and knowledge gaps among patients and providers. The outcome measure was CRC screening rates, while stool test and colonoscopy completion rates served as process measures. Major interventions included the use of a patient-navigator, leveraging digital health technology to create a novel CRC screening data dashboard, educating patients and providers, patient centered-shared decision making, and creating messages and educational videos in patient's preferred languages. We used monthly run charts and statistical process control charts (SPC) for data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We observed a sustainable, steady increase in CRC screening rates from baseline rates of 27.0-40.0% (n = 1304/3271) during the study period and 45.6% (n = 1493/3,271) six months post-study, with median rates of 34.0% in the run chart and mean rates of 43.0% in the SPC chart. Furthermore, we observed an increase in colonoscopy completion rates during the study and six months post-study to 65.0% (n = 411/631) and 72.9% (n = 461/631) respectively, from a baseline rate of 25.0%, with a median of 63.0% in the monthly run chart.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The increase in CRC screening rates highlights the effectiveness of addressing barriers such as health literacy, language preferences, and knowledge gaps. This underscores the value of a multifaceted approach and the role of a patient navigator in enhancing preventive, patient-centered care. This project focused on population health and addressing social determinants of health to overcome disparities and improve CRC screening in a primary care setting. Continued emphasis on these strategies is likely to further advance colorectal cancer screening efforts.</p>","PeriodicalId":9012,"journal":{"name":"BMC Health Services Research","volume":"24 1","pages":"1422"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11572305/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11928-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim of this quality improvement (QI) project was to increase Colorectal Cancer (CRC) screening in patients ages 50-75 years from a baseline of 27-40% within 12 months in a primary care clinic in limited resource communities.

Methods: The multidisciplinary QI-team applied the Plan-Do-Study-Act method and developed stakeholder analysis, an Ishikawa fish bone diagram, a process flow map, and a driver diagram. Major barriers to suboptimal CRC screening included limited health literacy, language preferences, absence of stool test options, and knowledge gaps among patients and providers. The outcome measure was CRC screening rates, while stool test and colonoscopy completion rates served as process measures. Major interventions included the use of a patient-navigator, leveraging digital health technology to create a novel CRC screening data dashboard, educating patients and providers, patient centered-shared decision making, and creating messages and educational videos in patient's preferred languages. We used monthly run charts and statistical process control charts (SPC) for data analysis.

Results: We observed a sustainable, steady increase in CRC screening rates from baseline rates of 27.0-40.0% (n = 1304/3271) during the study period and 45.6% (n = 1493/3,271) six months post-study, with median rates of 34.0% in the run chart and mean rates of 43.0% in the SPC chart. Furthermore, we observed an increase in colonoscopy completion rates during the study and six months post-study to 65.0% (n = 411/631) and 72.9% (n = 461/631) respectively, from a baseline rate of 25.0%, with a median of 63.0% in the monthly run chart.

Conclusion: The increase in CRC screening rates highlights the effectiveness of addressing barriers such as health literacy, language preferences, and knowledge gaps. This underscores the value of a multifaceted approach and the role of a patient navigator in enhancing preventive, patient-centered care. This project focused on population health and addressing social determinants of health to overcome disparities and improve CRC screening in a primary care setting. Continued emphasis on these strategies is likely to further advance colorectal cancer screening efforts.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在初级保健环境中促进大肠癌筛查健康公平的多方面策略:质量改进项目。
项目背景该质量改进(QI)项目旨在提高 50-75 岁患者的结直肠癌(CRC)筛查率,在 12 个月内将资源有限社区初级保健诊所的基线筛查率从 27% 提高到 40%:多学科 QI 小组采用了 "计划-实施-研究-行动 "方法,并制定了利益相关者分析、石川鱼骨图、流程图和驱动力图。未达到最佳 CRC 筛查效果的主要障碍包括健康知识有限、语言偏好、缺乏粪便检测选项以及患者和医疗服务提供者之间的知识差距。CRC 筛查率是衡量结果的指标,而粪便检测和结肠镜检查完成率则是衡量过程的指标。主要干预措施包括使用患者导航仪、利用数字医疗技术创建新颖的 CRC 筛查数据仪表板、教育患者和医疗服务提供者、以患者为中心共享决策制定,以及用患者偏好的语言制作信息和教育视频。我们使用月度运行图和统计过程控制图(SPC)进行数据分析:我们观察到,在研究期间,结肠癌筛查率从基线的 27.0%-40.0% (n = 1304/3271)持续稳步上升,研究结束后六个月的筛查率为 45.6%(n = 1493/3271),其中运行图的中位数为 34.0%,SPC 图的平均值为 43.0%。此外,我们还观察到,在研究期间和研究后六个月,结肠镜检查完成率分别从基线的 25.0% 提高到 65.0%(n = 411/631)和 72.9%(n = 461/631),每月运行图的中位数为 63.0%:结论:CRC 筛查率的提高凸显了解决健康知识普及、语言偏好和知识差距等障碍的有效性。这凸显了多层面方法的价值,以及患者导航员在加强以患者为中心的预防性护理中的作用。该项目侧重于人群健康和解决健康的社会决定因素,以克服差异并改善初级保健环境中的 CRC 筛查。继续强调这些策略可能会进一步推动结直肠癌筛查工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Health Services Research
BMC Health Services Research 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
1372
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Health Services Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of health services research, including delivery of care, management of health services, assessment of healthcare needs, measurement of outcomes, allocation of healthcare resources, evaluation of different health markets and health services organizations, international comparative analysis of health systems, health economics and the impact of health policies and regulations.
期刊最新文献
Australian and Canadian clinicians' views and application of 'carbon health literacy': a qualitative study. Decarbonizing surgical care: a qualitative systematic review guided by the Congruence Model. Qualitative exploration of 3D printing in Swedish healthcare: perceived effects and barriers. A tailored intervention for the detection of patients with coronary heart disease and mental or cognitive comorbidities in the German primary care setting: qualitative evaluation of implementation success. Breaking barriers: a qualitative exploration of healthcare access for crack cocaine users in Limerick.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1